BOSTON -- Attorneys for former Senate President Stan Rosenberg and his husband, Bryon Hefner, argued in court Wednesday that allowing one of Hefner's alleged victims to shield his identity does not allow for a level playing field.

John Doe is a legislative aide who accused Hefner of sexually assaulting him three separate times in 2015 and 2016. Doe says Rosenberg knew about Hefner's behavior and still gave Hefner access to his political contacts. Doe sued Rosenberg and Hefner for civil damages. Hefner is also facing criminal charges.

"The playing field is not level as long as the plaintiff is allowed to proceed anonymously," attorney Michael Pineault, who represents Rosenberg in the civil case. "Having to stand behind your allegations publicly promotes accountability and promotes credibility and truthfulness."

Doe's attorneys, Mitchell Garabedian and William Gordon, argued that anonymity is necessary to shield their client from emotional harm.

"It's a very, very delicate path for a victim to come forward emotionally because they feel such pain, such humiliation, and unnecessarily such guilt that it just tears at them, it eats at them," Garabedian said after the court hearing.

Garabedian said Doe is speaking out on behalf of all sexual abuse victims everywhere.

"He's sending a message that he is proud and strong, and all victims of sexual abuse should be proud and strong and step forward," Garabedian said. "It's an incremental approach. Some victims will not come forward for decades, when they do they want to impound their identities. After time, they realize they're strong enough to reveal their identities."

Suffolk Superior Court Judge Robert Tochka will take the matter under advisement and issue a decision.

Doe is a man in his early 20s who worked for the House of Representatives.

"He's an adult seeking to protect his name and seeking to avoid embarrassment of being revealed as a sexual abuse victim," Gordon said in court. "In this case, our client was harmed emotionally because of what happened."

Attorneys for Doe relied on a letter from a psychiatrist, who found that it would cause the victim "irreparable harm" if his name were released.

The psychiatrist said, Doe suffered the loss of a close family member in the last year, which makes him vulnerable. Doe is afraid that if his name is revealed, his symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety will worsen, Gordon said.

Attorneys for Hefner and Rosenberg argued that the doctor's letter is not sufficient to justify impounding Doe's identity.

Pineault said in court that the letter is based only on Doe's own concerns about his reputation being tarnished, which is not sufficient under law. The doctor's conclusions that Doe would suffer psychological harm are "speculative and illusory," Pineault said.

Pineault said the behavior of anonymous internet commenters shows that people granted anonymity feel freer to make accusations. Requiring the plaintiff to reveal his name "promotes accountability and truthfulness," he said.

Pineault said releasing his name might also trigger members of the public to provide relevant information to Rosenberg and Hefner's attorneys -- a benefit that Doe's attorneys already have since Rosenberg and Hefner's names are public.

It would also allow the media to explore the plaintiff's position, his motives and what he might have to gain from the lawsuit.